From lowen at pari.edu Thu May 1 20:09:05 2008 From: lowen at pari.edu (Lamar Owen) Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 20:09:05 -0400 Subject: [Aurora-sparc-devel] Install Cd's? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200805012009.05712.lowen@pari.edu> On Monday 28 April 2008, Dean Anderson wrote: > I'm not accusing you of hiding anything with malice or bad intent. > Primarilly its your process that is flawed, and its the process that > needs to be fixed. Dean, have you attempted to do a rebuild in the way the fedora-release engineering team recommends, to see if you can duplicate it? Lots and lots of things have changed in a very short time, and what may have been true for prior releases is almost certainly not true now. The Fedora Project process is now what is being used to make Aurora; you are aware of this, right? Are you saying the Fedora process is flawed? See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ReleaseEngineering/Overview for an overview of the process that Tom, as a member of the Fedora Release Engineering team, has helped build over several Fedora releases. The intent, as you can see at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/SPARC , is for Aurora to be merged into Fedora as Fedora/SPARC. I personally look forward to when these configs and such are added to the Wiki at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures/SPARC to fill in the "*** TODO: List buildservers, specs, here ***" section. But unless and until I am willing to spend the time doing it, I really can't complain about the current state. I can donate hardware to help (is the E3000 still running, Dennis?), or donate my time to build (I don't have enough of that, sorry). Or donate my time and machines to test. But, if I might make a suggestion, Dennis, Tom: an update of the Auroralinux website pointing to the Fedora/SPARC pages, and a filling out of those pages, would be very welcomed once the hard and important work of the merge is done (I've been seeing the traffic on the Fedora-sparc mailing list; whew, lots of work going on). I realize Fedora/SPARC isn't here yet. But, Dean, that is where it's headed. And, quite honestly, I'd rather Tom and Dennis spend their time doing something towards the future rather than documenting what is shortly going to be the past. After all, 2.9x was labeled beta and shouldn't be used in production. If you are, then you need to understand the risks and responsibilities of doing that; including that you may not be able to recompose from source. But understand that the recompose issue you see with the releases you've tried it with will be moot soon enough. While I personally would love to see rebuild instructions in their entirety posted, I also know well enough that Tom and Dennis are working on the Fedora project itself, and that the SPARC dist isn't the only thing vying for their attentions. And, IMHO, by merging into the Fedora Project proper, the process is being 'fixed.' The Fedora process is quite transparent, once you find which windows to look through. It is also a very repeatable process; I know I would prefer sparc-specific patches to go upstream on the packages in question so that a compose of Fedora/SPARC is just as automatic as a compose of Fedora/i386 is. This also means that the same processes and code that are getting many eyes in the i386 and x86_64 world is turning out the SPARC dist; this will be a very good place to be and will help the SPARC Fedora be the best SPARC Linux it can be. And it means that the same build/compose instructions that work on i386 will JUST WORK on SPARC. Dean, perhaps you need to study the Fedora process and see how it self-hosts and bootstraps. You may find your concerns are completely taken care of. But, if they are not, word is that Ubuntu is looking for help in their SPARC port. -- Lamar Owen www.pari.edu